https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199197 A prior acquittal on a distinct charge did not bar a later prosecution for separate offences under autrefois acquit or the statutory prohibition on a second trial for the same offence, but a final finding of fact essential to the earlier acquittal remained binding. Where a competent criminal court had already conclusively found that the accused was not present at the scene, the prosecution in a later proceeding between the same parties could not lead evidence contradicting that finding. The rule applied was issue estoppel, which operates independently of the Code's bar against retrial for the same offence. The acquittal was therefore sustained. en-us Wed, 11 Mar 1964 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 22 Feb 2018 15:31:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199197 A prior acquittal on a distinct charge did not bar a later prosecution for separate offences under autrefois acquit or the statutory prohibition on a second trial for the same offence, but a final finding of fact essential to the earlier acquittal remained binding. Where a competent criminal court had already conclusively found that the accused was not present at the scene, the prosecution in a later proceeding between the same parties could not lead evidence contradicting that finding. The rule applied was issue estoppel, which operates independently of the Code's bar against retrial for the same offence. The acquittal was therefore sustained. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 11 Mar 1964 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199197